Re: [tip:x86/asm] x86/i386: Make sure stack-protector segment baseis cache aligned

[H. Peter Anvin]

On 09/03/2009 01:45 PM, Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote:
> 
> Two problems:
> 
>     * gcc generates %gs: references for stack-protector, but we use %fs
>       for percpu data (because restoring %fs is faster if it's a null
>       selector; TLS uses %gs).  I guess we could use %fs if
>       !CONFIG_CC_STACKPROTECTOR, or %gs if we are using it (though that
>       has some fiddly ramifications for things like ptrace).

Well, by touching two segments we're getting the worst of both worlds,
so at least assuming some significant number of real-world deployments
use CC_STACKPROTECTOR, we really don't want to pessimize that case too much.

>     * The i386 percpu %fs base is offset by -__per_cpu_start from the
>       percpu variables, so we can directly refer to %fs:per_cpu__foo. 
>       I'm not sure what it would take to unify i386 to use the same
>       scheme as x86-64.

OK, I was under the impression that that had already been done (and no,
I didn't bother to look at the code.)  I guess I was wrong (and yes,
this is an absolute precondition.)

> Neither looks insoluble.

Agreed.  Looks like something that can and probably should be done but
is a bit further out.

	-hpa
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/